Scoping Review—Diabetes Technology for Individuals on Kidney Replacement Therapy (Dialysis): Current Trends and Future Directions
Authors' conclusion
This review highlights the potential of CGM and AID to improve diabetes outcomes in people on dialysis. While their clinical utility is evident, broader access and further research are needed to optimize their use in this high-risk population.
Study context
- Population
- People receiving dialysis using diabetes technology (continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), CSII/AID)64 studies
- Outcome
- Utilization, accuracy and effectiveness of diabetes technology on dialysis
Methodological detailsJoanna Briggs Institute methodology, systematic searches of Medline, Embase and CINAHL, Records identified: 1060 CGM and 1467 CSII/AID
- Joanna Briggs Institute methodology
- Systematic searches of Medline, Embase and CINAHL
- Records identified: 1060 CGM and 1467 CSII/AID
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
- CGM accuracy (18 studies): Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) range
- 8.1% to 29%
- CGM readings in Clarke error grid zones A or B
- over 97%
- Glycemic markers (13 studies): HbA1c underestimated glucose
- 7.3 mmol/mol
- Glycated albumin correlation
- r = 0.508
- Dialysis effects (4 studies): mean glucose lower with automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) (181 ± 64 mg/dL) vs continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) (238 ± 67 mg/dL)
- P < .05
- Treatment efficacy using CGM (11 studies): dulaglutide reduced glucose CV from 28.1% to 19.8%
- P = .003
- Glycemic outcomes (22 studies): TIR lower on dialysis days (80.2%)
- P = .02
- AID (4 studies): TIR improvements of up to
- 37.6%
- AID (4 studies): reduction in glucose
- 1.5 mmol/L (P = .003)
Original publication
Scoping Review—Diabetes Technology for Individuals on Kidney Replacement Therapy (Dialysis): Current Trends and Future Directions. J Diabetes Sci Technol. Published 2 September 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →